Cold War via Raj Bhavan

    The recent removal of Ms. Kamla Beniwal as the Governor of Mizoram has again seeded a political row where the opposition, ironically the Congress(I), are crying foul by terming the decision as vendetta politics. The President decided to sack the governor using his Constitutional power after serious allegations surfaced against her in the media. It was revealed that Ms. Beniwal spent Rs. 8.5 crore of the taxpayers money on frequent air travel when she was incharge in Gujarat. Some reports also mentions her alleged involvement in a land scam four years ago, in her home state Rajasthan. She is accused of acquiring plots of land from the government on claims of working 14 to 16 hours a day as farm labour, even when she was a minister in the state's Congress government.

    The ho-haa made by the Congress(I) and it's allies in UPA is somewhat questionable. One must actually take these Congress(I) MPs back in the year of 2004 when the UPA-I came to power. The then Home Minister Shivraj Patil had himself called upon Lal Krishna Advani asking him to tell their governors to submit papers which were appointed during the BJP led NDA regime. The Congress(I) gave statement, in defending their decision, that the Governor's are being removed from the office as their ideologies do not match with that of the government which is in power at the Centre. Another Congress(I) leader Salman Khursheed also said further, after BJP denied the request of asking resignation saying they are holding Constitutional office, that the BJP is still to come to terms with the fact that it lost the general election. So, any issue that it can berate the new government with comes in handy. The same government when it came back to power again in 2009 with UPA-II, while sacking Governors, said "The government asserted that it had the right to remove a Governor without any attribution or fault if it did not have confidence in him or her." So why are the Congress(I) MPs not practicing what they preached. It seems to be just the issue which is meat and drink for the weak opposition party with lack of issues and numbers.

    The appointment of Sheila Dixit as the Governor of Kerala just few days before the Model Code of Conduct came into force did raise many eyebrows. The post, it seems, was used by the UPA to grant immunity to it's leaders from independent probes. Dikshit was under severe scrutiny for alleged irregularities in the CWG scam in 2010. Also recently the Maharashtra Governor went out of the way by denying permission to the CBI to prosecute former Maharashtra CM Ashok Chavan in the Adarsh Housing Society Scam.

    The Governor does not has any fix tenure. The Constitution lays down the normal tenure to be 5 years. However, it can be terminated by, a) the President, at whose pleasure he/she holds the office b) a resignation. The dignity of Governor's office demands that the moment a union government does not want him/her, he/she must walk out. A governor never asks on what merit he is appointed, so why must he/she ask questions on being removed?

    When the Prime Minister advises for a removal of a Governor the President is not bound to accept it unless it is in consultation with the Cabinet. So when the Central Government sends in a request for a removal of the Governor the President can return it for the recommendations from the Council of Ministers. However if  the same request comes twice the president has no choice but to accept it. This is laid down in the Constitution in the section that describes the President's power.

    It makes us curious why are these methods followed year after year and government after government. It is mainly because of the Special Powers the Governor holds which can allow the Central Government to intervene in the functioning of the State. It includes: a) Governor can hold a bill for a indefinite time period. This power can be exercised when the Central government wants to delay any legislative measure initiated by the State, b) the Government can also take direct control of the State by imposing President's rule wherein all powers rest with the Governor, c) Governor can dimiss the elected government of the State.

    So reasons for removal or resignations of the Governor's after change of guard in New Delhi can be many, but the bottom line of the story is, all of them are always political in nature.

SR.